New 1st class medical duration

[ASA_Aviator]

It probably didn't hurt that ALPA was all over the previous memo being a blatant violation of the CBA.

The company had no idea that this was in the works. Unfortunately, that means that they couldn't comply until they had some sort of technical solution, which apparently they have now.

I don't see why everyone freaked out about this. Of course the company would comply, but you can't expect computer programs to update themselves overnight. CrewTrac automatically removes you from duty if your medical expires. Until that is fixed, ain't nobody flying with a 7 month old 1st class...

(Again, it looks like they have a temporary solution at ASA...)

 

[Flyer1015]

Pinnacle put out a similar memo. Captains still have to get a new medical every 6 months, until SABRE can updated to reflect the new change.

Such BS. Pinnacle management didn't want to spend the money to fix the problem, instead, they claimed they were out of the loophole about this new medical extension ruling.

BS!

 

[sweptback]

The company had no idea that this was in the works. Unfortunately, that means that they couldn't comply until they had some sort of technical solution, which apparently they have now.

I don't see why everyone freaked out about this. Of course the company would comply, but you can't expect computer programs to update themselves overnight. CrewTrac automatically removes you from duty if your medical expires. Until that is fixed, ain't nobody flying with a 7 month old 1st class...

(Again, it looks like they have a temporary solution at ASA...)

It doesn't matter if they have a solution or not, nor that the change took them by surprise. They have to comply per our contract, which is why you saw SH backtrack as quickly as he did on the next email.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

It doesn't matter if they have a solution or not, nor that the change took them by surprise. They have to comply per our contract, which is why you saw SH backtrack as quickly as he did on the next email.

Are you kidding me? If the company is attempting to comply, but cannot immediately due to technological constraints, what do you expect them to do? Unfortunately, it takes time to deal with surprises.

BTW, Scott didn't backtrack, he just said that they had found a work around solution until the software can be fixed. We would have had to wait a reasonable amount of time if a work around solution could not have been found. I bet it will take Sabre no more than a week to update the software.

I don't understand why you guys are so anti-common sense. If you step back, take a deep breath, and realize that the management is not trying to screw you at every turn, you will be much happier.

 

[ReverseSensing]

Turns out Horizon is going to comply manually. It doesn't take a fancy computer program re-write in the short term to do the correct thing and comply with the contract. It just takes a file clerk to manually keep track of the data until the computers are fixed. Gee, what a concept.

Just another case of one idiot Ass Chief Pilot at Horizon making it up as he goes.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Turns out Horizon is going to comply manually. It doesn't take a fancy computer program re-write in the short term to do the correct thing and comply with the contract. It just takes a file clerk to manually keep track of the data until the computers are fixed. Gee, what a concept.

Just another case of one idiot Ass Chief Pilot at Horizon making it up as he goes.

Unfortunately, that is not true at ASA. No one can fly if they aren't in the CrewTrac system, and CrewTrac won't let anyone fly if their medical is out of date. There is no "over ride" to that sort of de-qualification. So even if a "clerk" notices that the pilot hasn't really de-qualified due to his medical, there is nothing they can do except remove them from the trip.

It is a relatively simple software fix, and there is a temporary work around in place until it is updated.

 

[DoinTime]

Unfortunately, that is not true at ASA. No one can fly if they aren't in the CrewTrac system, and CrewTrac won't let anyone fly if their medical is out of date. There is no "over ride" to that sort of de-qualification. So even if a "clerk" notices that the pilot hasn't really de-qualified due to his medical, there is nothing they can do except remove them from the trip.

It is a relatively simple software fix, and there is a temporary work around in place until it is updated.

There is a simple CrewQual (qualification end of CrewTrac) fix. Everyone effected just needs to have a new certificate inputted in what would have been their due month. For a pilot group the size of PCL thats about 50 manual inputs per month.

Unfortunately for PCL they can either comply with the new FAA standard right now or pay for the unnecessary examinations per our working agreement. The choice is theirs to make.

 

[sweptback]

Are you kidding me? If the company is attempting to comply, but cannot immediately due to technological constraints, what do you expect them to do? Unfortunately, it takes time to deal with surprises.

BTW, Scott didn't backtrack, he just said that they had found a work around solution until the software can be fixed. We would have had to wait a reasonable amount of time if a work around solution could not have been found. I bet it will take Sabre no more than a week to update the software.

I don't understand why you guys are so anti-common sense. If you step back, take a deep breath, and realize that the management is not trying to screw you at every turn, you will be much happier.

It's not a matter of whether I think the company is screwing us or not. It's a matter of them complying with a contract that they agreed to. Let me put it to you this way. Say the company says, due to a problem with our payroll provider we can't pay you on the 15th. We'll pay you both checks at the end of the month, and after they update the software things will be back to normal next month. Our payroll provider sprung this on us at the last possible minute and we have no way of paying people other than through the payroll service.

After all, that wouldn't be a big deal, right? We're still getting paid. Or, would you have a problem with that?

 

[ASA_Aviator]

It's not a matter of whether I think the company is screwing us or not. It's a matter of them complying with a contract that they agreed to. Let me put it to you this way. Say the company says, due to a problem with our payroll provider we can't pay you on the 15th. We'll pay you both checks at the end of the month, and after they update the software things will be back to normal next month. Our payroll provider sprung this on us at the last possible minute and we have no way of paying people other than through the payroll service.

After all, that wouldn't be a big deal, right? We're still getting paid. Or, would you have a problem with that?

I would expect a work around, which is what the company did in this case. They immediately began working on a fix, and one was found. In your example, if there were no immediate fix possible, I would understand, and make arrangements in my life to accommodate it. (In your particular case, it is obviously possible to print checks, but it wasn't clear immediately if it would be possible to fix the problem with a temporary fix or not, so it isn't exactly apples to apples is it?)

What I wouldn't do is start crying foul so quickly, and claiming that the company is trying to screw us, etc. etc.